Opioids SR-17018 Is the future of opioid detox medication. Painless easy cheat to avoid withdrawal that is too good to be true, but it is legit and real.

[4DQSAR]

The original producers are, I'm sure, pragmatic. After all, if a dubious company in the USA will order the stuff in kilograms (in fact likely in 10s of Kgs) then the pretense of it being for detoxification becomes pointless. As long as they legally made their money, that's all that matters.

It always amazed me that people thought the producers acted out of altrusim.

Most of the things they sell turn out not to become popular and if one does, the 'why?' of it becoming popular is of no interest. All that matters is the profit.

I'm still amazed people haven't figured out the ALL of the orphines are made by ONE producer. I mean, sure, if an example becomes popular, competitors will spot the fact but they offered dozens of them with cychlorphine being sold on the dubious statment 'as potent as carfentanil' and I see cybrorphine appeared on Wikipedia on 16th July 2026. Now look at who created both pages - heck, check who created the page for EVERY orphine. If I worked for the DEA, whoever THAT is would get the knock. Meodipt seems to know all about the class before anyone else... EVERY time.

So yeah, whoever that is clearly is the producer OR is an asset of the producer who is rewarded for posting on Wikipedia (thus creating the illusion of them being establised medicines). Because being building Wikipedia pages isn't a criminal act.

 

[Featherfall]

We have reports of people VAPING the stuff which makes perfect sense. The pKa of eople are buying multiple bottles of tablets at £8 each, that IS a rational business model.

no fucking way??? thats insane, must feel crazy vindicating for your though damn

 

[Featherfall]

So yeah, whoever that is clearly is the producer OR is an asset of the producer who is rewarded for posting on Wikipedia (thus creating the illusion of them being establised medicines). Because being building Wikipedia pages isn't a criminal act.

They are incredibly recent for how unknown they are, the one you mention has data from july already. Might just be a autistic drug nerds specific thing but its very strange

 

[Featherfall]

They are incredibly recent for how unknown they are, the one you mention has data from july already. Might just be a autistic drug nerds specific thing but its very strange

this guy @4DQSAR ?

User:Meodipt - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[4DQSAR]

Yep - Look at R6372.

The fact potency value is stated based on a citation which contains NO potency evaluation makes me think something is going on here beyond 'drug nerd'.

The species for which the potency value is derived in not specified either - so to me that looks like someone who has been TOLD the human potency but thinks people won't check the citation (singular). I mean, don't you ALWAYS state the species when giving a potency value?

BTW
U.S. Patent 3,155,670 does cover it.
P. A. J. Janssen and C. A. M. van der Eycken in: Drugs Affecting the CNS (A. Burger, ed.), Vol. 2, p. 25, Dekker, New York (1968) gives a potency of x400 morphine in animal (mouse) models.

This again makes me think the person isn't slogging away to find obscure compounds (for which there is no rational reason for a Wikipedia page to even be created) is closely following what novel opioids are being produced in China. To the point of pages being created on the same day a novel compound is first offered has bad optics.

Another reason I don't trust Wikipedia. Because nobody is paid, someone offering an income for creating pages that won't instantly be removed (given the person has Wikipedia awards/rank thus power over which pages are allowed to remain and those that get removed) does rather invite Chinese producers to subourn such people.

But DO check. Don't believe it because it's me saying it. Come to your own conclusions - I'm fallible so in truth I would appreciate others confirming or equally dismissing my suspicions.

It concerns me because too many people blindly trust Wikipedia and you only need one bad apple to have someone able to lend a LOT of credibility to what is in truth a totally untested compound where we have no idea whatsoever how potent or how toxic they are in man.

You know me - I have NEVER told a single person to consume anything ever. I therefore cannot benefit from my providing information and in HR, trust is something that when lost can never be recovered.

 

[Featherfall]

The fact potency value is stated based on a citation which contains NO potency evaluatio makes me think something is going on here beyond 'drug nerd'.

The species for which the potency value is derived in not specified either - so to me that looks like someone who has been TOLD the human potency but thinks people won't check the citation (singular). I mean, don't you ALWAYS state the species when giving a potency value?

BTW
U.S. Patent 3,155,670 does cover it.
P. A. J. Janssen and C. A. M. van der Eycken in: Drugs Affecting the CNS (A. Burger, ed.), Vol. 2, p. 25, Dekker, New York (1968) gives a potency of x400 morphine in animal (mouse) models.

This again makes me think the person isn't slogging away to find obscure compounds (for which there is no rational reason for a Wikipedia page to even be created) is closely following what novel opioids are being produced in China. To the point of pages being created on the same day a novel compound is first offered has bad optics.

Another reason I don't trust Wikipedia. Because nobody is paid, someone offering an income for creating pages that won't instantly be removed (given the person has Wikipedia awards/rank thus power over which pages are allowed to remain and those that get removed) does rather invite Chinese producers to subourn such people.

But DO check. Do believe it because it's me saying it. Come to your own conclusions - I'm fallible so in truth I would asppreciate others confirming or equally dismissing my suspicions.

It concerns me because too many people blindly trust Wikipedia and you only need one bad apple to have someone able to lend a LOT of credibility to what is in truth a totally untested compound where we have no idea whatsoever how potent or how toxic they are in man.

You know me - I have NEVER told a single person to consume anything ever. I therefore cannot benefit from my providing information and in HR, trust is something that when lost can never be recovered.

I see your suspicions, but do you have any timeline of when a article was created correlating it with chinese manufacturers offering/synthesizing them?

 

[4DQSAR]

I've been noting the pattern for over a year but until now had nothing I could point to that everyone could clearly see was dubious. Saying 'approximately twice as potent as fentanyl' in itself is a REALLY suspicious thing to do. Especially when AFAIK even animal models showed a range and of course all academic papers compare potency to MORPHINE.

So I suggest we can guess at the market it's aimed at.

The fact that the two original references are omitted. That might help us work out who it ISN'T. I think we can safely state whoever it is cannot access Reaxys as that gives those two references in an instant. Or anyone who has read Janssen's work systematically i.e. someone who alighted on the compound after extensive research or indeed any of the papers in which related compounds are used in training-sets so not a medicinal chemist, I don't think.

Most people didn't waste 13 years of their lives becoming medicinal chemists and that's not a surprise, almost nobody would want to do it even if they could. But while I see red flags all over the place, will the average user who spots the compound for sale? If the Wikipedia page says it's twice as potent as fentanyl...

Look at the page history.

One contributor BogHog, if you link to their page says 'retired from Wikipedia' The date that was posted was BEFORE they apparently modified the page on R6372. So another red flag?

The other (there are only three) is named 'Graeme Bartlett' who classifies chemicals but has never before modified a page about a specific drug. I would classify them as an 'unconscious asset' because the more names, the more trustworthy a pages seems. From looking at all the other stuff GB has added, it does seem that they must have been asked to add the classification. That isn't something you would typically do the moment you create a page. GB posts on numerous topics (including the Fresian language, Hong Kong and Geology) so my guess is the person who created the page invited them to add a classification just to lend verisimilitude to the page.

Google finds the seller as the first result, I assume because NOBODY would have 'R6372' as a keyword.

But what else can I do? Even if I could say to Wikipedia that the page isn't safe would result in a simple vote on it being removed and how many registered Wikipedia users actually cast votes? A handful of people upvoting it would mean it stays.

Don't forget, we are finding social media accounts set up decades ago coming alive so I assume Wikipedia accounts for 'burner' purposes likewise exist.

But the thing that matters is that someone is using Wikipedia to sell their drugs. Asserting a confidence that this is a well known, well characterized drug when in fact we know almost nothing.

But just as it appears that the BogHog accout may have been compromised, we also need to consider that the person who apparently created the page may also have had their Wikipedia account compromised. But if I'm being honest, I think it far more likely that the account hasn't been hacked, the person whose account it is has been suborned in some way.

After all, is it a crime to add a Wikipedia page? There would have to be a real incentive to poke around into a person's life. If they have crypto and transfers match page creation, then possibly in the US a RICO charge could be filed, but in truth, while I find it abhorrent, I don't think the creator has broken the law. I think they have no morals and are fine with people dying but amorality isn't a crime.

 

[4DQSAR]

I am glad to say that the reason that the 1,3,8-triazaspiro[4.5]decan-4-one class of compound was never developed by Janssen (or anyone else) is because the vast majority of analgesic activity is mediated by the NOP receptor, not the MOP receptor hence they don't substitute for 'classic' opioids.

I mean maybe it has some MOP activity, but I knew seomeone who made that very compound and binned it because they were not impressed. They certainly don't trigger the reward circuitry of the brain so who knows, if someone is in AWS, it may help, but I would be very surprised if it substituted for fentanyl.

The fact none of the above is a secret may hint that someone is dim enough to think they got a bargain and still cannot fathom why nobody is buying their (bulk) product. I say bulk because these people sell Kgs and if misrepresented as fentanyl, that would still be treated as 'intent to supply'.

 

[Featherfall]

I am glad to say that the reason that the 1,3,8-triazaspiro[4.5]decan-4-one class of compound was never developed by Janssen (or anyone else) is because the vast majority of analgesic activity is mediated by the NOP receptor, not the MOP receptor hence they don't substitute for 'classic' opioids.

I mean maybe it has some MOP activity, but I knew seomeone who made that very compound and binned it because they were not impressed. They certainly don't trigger the reward circuitry of the brain so who knows, if someone is in AWS, it may help, but I would be very surprised if it substituted for fentanyl.

The fact none of the above is a secret may hint that someone is dim enough to think they got a bargain and still cannot fathom why nobody is buying their (bulk) product. I say bulk because these people sell Kgs and if misrepresented as fentanyl, that would still be treated as 'intent to supply'.

maybe an attempt to make local drug dealers dilute their own product and hoping they hit the next carfentanyl

 

[4DQSAR]

That is EXACTLY the market they are going for hence offering to sell Kg batches.

Of course in truth they are nowhere nearly like carfentanil because those rodenrt models of pain? Well there are 4 classes of opiate receptor and of those three produce analgesia... but also hallucinations, seizures and so on.

One or two have been mentioned in coroners reports but it seems only a few people are fooled and dealers are unlikely to just trust Wikipedia if they are shelling out $80000...